Red Light Cameras Rev Up Renewed Debate

Contractor Cites Traffic Fatalities; ACLU Wary Of Claims

The legislature's transportation committee on Monday held what has become its annual public hearing on legalizing red light enforcement cameras — and although the proposal has always failed and the committee's co-chairman doubts its 2013 prospects, it still revved up a debate on issues ranging from civil rights to saving lives.

"Each year, about 300 traffic fatalities occur in Connecticut. Eighty-five percent of those deaths occur … on state and local roads, where intersections are often … a factor in fatal crashes," said Richard Retting, a traffic engineering consultant brought in by a camera contractor, Redflex Traffic Systems of Arizona, which plans to spend $72,000 this year on lobbying in Connecticut, state ethics records show.

"According to the Centers for Disease Control, the annual cost of fatal crashes in Connecticut is $260 million," Retting said. "The staggering cost borne by Connecticut taxpayers for preventable crashes must be weighed against the fines that would be paid by red light runners and the dubious claim that ticketing violators for committing traffic offenses on public roads represents an invasion of privacy."

But Andrew Schneider, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, said that red light cameras "enrich for-profit vendors and fail to provide the promised safety benefits and revenues for municipalities. They're also wildly unpopular with the public, who view them as a cynical cash grab."

"The cameras threaten due process that the Constitution guarantees in cases of civil as well as criminal violations," Schneider added. "The owners of cars are ticketed based on license plates, regardless of who was driving. Long intervals between the alleged violation and notification for the owners diminish their ability to defend themselves. If you were moving out of the way of an ambulance or fire truck at an intersection, could you remember it and prove it 60 days later?"

Both Retting and Schneider had offered similar testimony last year, when proponents of red light cameras made their most concerted effort ever and still fell short. Three legislative committees approved a bill to let municipalities use the electronic camera systems in 2012, but it never came up for a vote in either the House or the Senate.

The transportation committee's co-chairman, Rep. Antonio Guerrera, D-Rocky Hill, told The Courant Friday that "I don't see it happening this year," considering "everything else we have on our plate this year" as legislators — including major budget problems and issues such as gun control, school security, and mental health related to the December Newtown school massacre.

Guerrera floated the idea of a task force to study the issue, but no decisions were made Monday about three slightly different red light camera bills that aired at the hearing.

One of the leading proponents of red light cameras, Democratic Rep. Roland Lemar, said he had initially resisted the idea of using the cameras years ago until he saw how widespread disregard for traffic signals was diminishing the quality of life in his hometown of New Haven. He wondered if proponents and opponents could ever find common ground to resolve differences.

But differences persist. The state NAACP again has gone on record against the cameras, saying "these bills would impose automated ticketing unequally on the people living in urban areas. As we noted last year, that means disproportionately targeting minorities and the poor for a form of extra traffic enforcement that is inherently unfair, a type of geographical racial profiling." The group also said: "Typically, 90 percent of red-light camera tickets are issued for right-on-red violations, often involving harmless, technical infractions such as the failure to come to a 100 percent stop before turning."